This page is the rulebook. It sets out how we choose what to cover, how we rank, what we will and will not accept from brands, how we use AI, and how corrections work. It applies to every page on hairdryerlab.ca.
The short version: commission rates do not set our rankings. Brands cannot pay to remove a criticism. Every significant claim carries a label saying where it came from. And we state what we have not tested rather than estimating it.
What this policy covers
| Area | Rule | Where it is enforced |
|---|---|---|
| Ranking basis | Review analysis, listing data and our own measurements only | Every commercial page |
| Affiliate independence | Commission rates never set rankings | Affiliate disclosure |
| Samples and sponsorship | Disclosed when present; never purchased influence | Page-level disclosure |
| AI use | Disclosed; never generates measurements, reviews or expert identities | This page |
| Evidence labelling | Every significant claim carries a source label | Every guide |
| Corrections | Corrected openly with a visible date change | Contact |
How we choose which hair dryers to cover
We cover what Canadian buyers actually buy, not what brands pitch us. Our starting point is the Amazon.ca Hair Dryers category ranking, which tells us what is selling in Canada this month rather than what a manufacturer would like us to feature.
What gets a page:
- Models with enough Canadian sales or reviews that a reader might genuinely be considering them
- Products where our data reveals something a buyer would not otherwise know — a declining model, an unusually high complaint rate, or an inconsistency between marketing and evidence
- Models that answer a specific buyer need: fine hair, thick hair, travel, budget
What does not get a page:
- Products with too little Canadian sales activity to say anything meaningful about
- Products where we would only be able to restate the manufacturer’s specification list
- Anything a brand has asked us to feature, on the strength of that request
How we rank hair dryers
We rank on what breaks, not on what a specification sheet claims. That is a deliberate editorial choice, and it comes from our own data.
The evidence behind a ranking position:
- Reliability signals from review analysis — durability is the most negative topic in our dataset, with 946 negative mentions and an 84% negative share. Complaint rate by price band is therefore a ranking input rather than a footnote
- Seller structure — whether the listing is brand-operated and who holds the Buy Box, because that determines whether a warranty claim has a counterparty
- Verified price and rating at a stated check date
- Fit for a stated buyer — we rank for “most people”, “thick hair”, “budget” and similar, rather than pretending one dryer is best for everyone
- Our own measurements, once a unit has completed our test protocol
What is not an input: commission rate, brand relationship, advertising spend, or how prominently a brand has asked to be featured.
We avoid composite scores. We do not publish ratings like “9.4/10” or “94%”, because a single number hides the trade-offs that actually matter. We give category conclusions — drying speed, noise, weight, heat control, attachments, value — and we show the underlying figures wherever we have them.
Affiliate independence
This is the rule that matters most, so it is written plainly.
- Commission rates do not set rankings. A product is not recommended because it pays more
- A non-paying product can outrank a paying one. If a dryer with no affiliate relationship is better for a specific buyer, it is eligible for that position
- Brands cannot pay to remove a criticism. Not with money, not with samples, not with the threat of withdrawing a programme
- Editorial conclusions and commercial calls to action are presented separately. We do not write “because it is great value, click here to buy”
Our guides have excluded models that sell extremely well because the evidence did not support a recommendation. That is the standard we are committing to, and it is why we publish the reason a model is excluded rather than quietly omitting it.
Full detail is in our affiliate disclosure.
Product samples, gifts and sponsorship
If a brand supplies a unit, the page says so.
| Situation | What we do |
|---|---|
| Unit supplied by a brand | Disclose the acquisition method on the page |
| Unit purchased by us | Disclose that it was purchased at retail |
| Unit borrowed and returned | Disclose the loan and the return |
| Sponsored content | Label it as sponsored and exclude it from rankings |
| Paid placement | We do not accept it |
| Paid ranking or rating | We do not accept it |
| Payment to remove criticism | We do not accept it |
A supplied unit does not guarantee a positive conclusion. If a supplied unit fails our protocol or the review evidence is poor, we report that. Where a brand has had no editorial input, we say so on the page.
How we use AI
We use software, and we say so — because a review site that hides this is not being straight with you.
What AI is used for:
- Structuring research material and drafting early versions of explanatory sections
- Coding and classifying large volumes of review text during analysis
- Checking consistency across pages, such as heading structure and unit conventions
What AI is never used for:
- Generating measurements. Every number we publish as a measurement is taken by us with a stated method
- Generating reviews. We do not publish fabricated buyer experiences
- Generating expert identities. We do not invent named specialists with invented credentials. Our byline is a team byline because that is what we are
- Generating the underlying data. Our review analysis and listing data come from real sources with stated spans and limitations
Every page is reviewed by a human editor before publication, and every factual claim is traceable to either our own measurement or a source we can point to. If you believe a page does not meet that standard, tell us — that is a bug, and we will fix it.
Corrections, updates and how to challenge us
We correct pages openly rather than editing them silently.
- Corrections change the page’s last-updated date, so the change is visible
- Corrections affecting a recommendation take priority over general feedback
- If we got something materially wrong, we say so on the page rather than only in a private reply
- We do not remove criticism of a product because a brand, seller or representative asks
Prices and ratings are re-checked monthly on commercial pages, and every comparison table carries the date the figures were verified. A price without a date is not information, and we do not publish one.
How to challenge a conclusion: email editorial@hairdryerlab.ca with the page, the claim, and your evidence. The most useful messages we receive are specific corrections with a source. See contact for how to reach us and what we cannot help with.
Who writes this site
Hair Dryer Lab is produced by an editorial team, published under a team byline.
We deliberately do not invent named expert personas. You will not find a “certified trichologist” on this site who does not exist, or a “15 years in the salon industry” claim we cannot substantiate. Where we lack a form of expertise — and we lack hands-on testing expertise until our bench protocol is complete — we say so rather than borrowing authority we have not earned.
Our credentials are process credentials, not personal ones: a published method, a published dataset with its limitations stated, published editorial rules, and a visible correction history. If that is not enough for a particular decision, we would rather you knew now.
Our research method is published in full on how we test, and our principles are set out on about.
Frequently asked questions
Do affiliate commissions affect your rankings? No. Commission rates do not set rankings, and no brand has paid for a ranking, a rating or the removal of a criticism. Rankings follow the review analysis and listing data published on our methodology page. Our recommendations have favoured products on durability, price band and seller structure rather than on what a link pays.
Do you accept free products or sponsorship? If a brand supplies a review sample we will say so on the page, including the acquisition method. We do not accept payment for a ranking or a rating. If we ever publish sponsored content it will be labelled as sponsored and excluded from rankings entirely.
Do you use AI to write your content? We use software to help structure and draft, and we say so. Every published figure is either measured by us or sourced from data we can point to, and every page is reviewed by a human editor before it goes live. We do not publish AI-generated measurements, AI-generated reviews, or AI-generated expert identities.
How do you handle corrections? We correct the page and change its last-updated date rather than editing silently. Corrections that affect a recommendation take priority. We will not remove criticism of a product on request from a brand, a seller or a representative.
Why do you label every claim with a source? Because most buying guides mix manufacturer claims with verified facts and do not distinguish them. We label each significant claim as review analysis, listing data, buyer feedback, a manufacturer claim, or our own measurement, so you can weigh it appropriately.
Who writes Hair Dryer Lab? An editorial team, published under a team byline. We deliberately do not invent named expert personas or fabricate credentials. Where we lack expertise, we say so rather than borrowing authority we have not earned.